I sometimes listen to xian radio. I heard this little tidbit on Creation Moments. Thoughts?

Quote

How is coal made? How long does it take? Scientists did not know the answers to these questions until the last few years. Despite this lack of knowledge, textbooks have taught for generations that it takes millions of years to make coal. This was another supposed proof that the Bible’s view of history is wrong.

In recent years, scientists who believe in creation showed that coal could be formed in much less time. They also showed how the coal beds offered evidence that they were formed rapidly. Unfortunately for science, much of the scientific community ignored them because they were challenging claims made by evolution.

However, in the last 30 years, evolutionists in the scientific community have begun to produce their own work that confirms what creationists have been saying all along. For example, scientists at the Argonne National Laboratory heated lignin, the “glue” that holds the fibers in wood together, to 300 degrees (F) in the presence of clay. This temperature is fairly common in geological formations, and coal is found with clay. Even though the lignin was heated only for between two weeks and a year, coal formed. The lignin heated for a year produced high-grade coal. No, millions of years were not necessary.

This research further strengthens creationist research claims that the flood at the time of Noah, only about 4,500 years ago, is most likely responsible for most of the world’s coal beds. Again, the false scientific claims that challenged the truth of Scripture have been discredited.

This is very exciting news! I mean, how many coal miners die each year, digging deep into the bowels of the earth, just to bring us fuel.

I look to the creationists to use this strategy to create coal with just a little wood and clay, and save all of those miners from pain and suffering in the future. I mean, we are running low on most fossil fuels, and we certainly don't want god to come down and do another Noah-style flood, do we?

For example, scientists at the Argonne National Laboratory heated lignin, the “glue” that holds the fibers in wood together, to 300 degrees (F) in the presence of clay. This temperature is fairly common in geological formations, and coal is found with clay.

As they say it didn't take millions of years for the scientists to make synthetic coal. But when they say "common in geological formations", do they realize most geological formations do take millions of years to form. Mountains don't typically pop up overnight, canyons don't normally form after 40 days and nights of rain.

Scientists have been able to make artificial diamonds for quite some time now. But I fail to see how being able to make something artificially completely disproves a widely supported area of science.

Alright, now all creationists have to do is prove that the coal deposits around the world were formed this way, rather than through long-term compression of peat and other plant matter.

By the way, while temperatures above 300 degrees Fahrenheit do occur below the earth's surface, I'm pretty sure that you have to go pretty deep into the crust to get to that point. Not to mention that this is not the only way coal forms. That's why they have to prove that the coal around the world did form that way, rather than just pointing to a way to make synthetic coal and pretending that it proves their beliefs about the flood.

This is the problem with creationist beliefs. They already have what they want to discover in mind, so they only look for validation of what they already believe. Scientists, on the other hand, revise their explanations based on what they actually find. Personally, I find it rather neat that they can make coal this way; my question is whether it's cost-effective to do so.

Logged

Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!" If you can't show it, then you don't know it.